WOLA: Advocacy for Human Rights in the Americas
9 Apr 2008 | Publication | News

Opting for Engagement

Engagement with Cuba not only makes good sense domestically but is also far more likely to benefit dialogue and human rights in Cuba than isolation. This is the conclusion of the new WOLA publication "Opting for Engagement", which looks at the variety of ways other nations engage with Cuba and draws lessons from these experiences that will be crucial to U.S. policymakers as they look toward the next chapter in U.S.-Cuba relations.

Engagement with Cuba not only makes good sense domestically but is also far more likely to benefit dialogue and human rights in Cuba than isolation. This is the conclusion of the new WOLA publication "Opting for Engagement", which looks at the variety of ways other nations engage with Cuba and draws lessons from these experiences that will be crucial to U.S. policymakers as they look toward the next chapter in U.S.-Cuba relations.
 

Click here to download "Opting for Engagement"

Cuba specialists around the world have spent much of the past decade, and an even greater part of the period since July 2006, speculating on what the future holds for Cuba after the departure of Fidel Castro from power. Will there be a stable succession or a dramatic change? Will a post–Fidel government strengthen respect for the rule of law and human rights, extend freedom of speech, and permit multi-party elections? Will it try to preserve Cuba’s achievements in education and health care, and if so, how? Will it change the role of the state in the economy? How will a new government handle the process of political and economic reforms? These questions and others have consumed the attention of analysts and policy makers.

Comparatively little attention has been paid, especially in the United States, to how other countries have chosen to relate to and engage with Cuba during this decisive period on the island and how those relations might evolve in the future. This publication hopes to fill that gap, looking at how countries in Europe and the Western Hemisphere relate to Cuba and suggesting some useful lessons for the international community. The Washington Office on Latin America has undertaken this publication because it believes that the international community can engage with Cuba in constructive and respectful ways that will over time contribute to greater respect for human rights and democratization on the island.

The United States is one of the very few countries that does not have formal diplomatic and commercial relations with Cuba. But among the countries that do, the level of engagement and interaction has varied widely. The articles herein trace the shifting levels of engagement that Mexico, the United Kingdom, Canada, Spain, and the European Union have all had with Cuban government and society, where relations stand today, and where they might be headed. One article also looks at the U.S. approach and the implications of the U.S. strategy of isolation.

In 2007, many countries opted for a relatively cautious approach to Cuba, maintaining relations but taking few initiatives and adopting a passive stance based on the assumption that events on the island would dictate changes in the direction of their Cuba policy. Exploring this theme, Joaquín Roy’s article traces the internal debate over the European Union’s “wait and see” tactics, while John Kirk and Peter McKenna describe the recent cooling in Canadian relations with the island. As events have unfolded in Cuba, other governments have opted for increased levels of engagement as the island moves toward a post-Fidel Castro era. In this context, María Cristina Rosas explores the Mexican government’s changing approach, while Margaret Blunden reviews British relations with Cuba and appeals for a more constructive approach toward its government.

The British, Canadian, and Mexican perspectives have all concluded that engagement offers important benefits. As Geoff Thale notes in the piece on U.S. policy, disengagement and isolation have failed to undermine the Cuban government and have done little to improve the prospects for greater respect for human right on the part of Cuban authorities. A better alternative, he argues, would be to interact with Cuba, as a deeper understanding of its government, institutions and civil society will necessarily lead to a more positive outcome.

Many governments have also recognized that engagement allows greater cooperation on issues of common concern, such as security, terrorism, trade and migration.

One striking element that emerges is the extent to which the United States’ relations with Cuba continue to cast a long shadow over other countries’ approaches. The ebbs and flows in third countries’ relationships with Cuba are often influenced by the closeness of their relationship with the United States. Still, it is remarkable how unsuccessful U.S. pressure to isolate Cuba has been among even some of Washington’s closest allies, as demonstrated by these cases.

As these articles make clear, nations have their own particular set of concerns and interests in relation to the island. Most countries have economic and political interests that dispose them toward engaging with Cuba. Clearly, most governments also have concerns about human rights and political freedoms in Cuba. Most choose to pursue these concerns in the context of engagement with Cuba; none have adopted the sanctions regime that the United States has pursued nor sought regime change.

The articles follow the history of Canadian, U.S., European Union (with a focus on Spain and the United Kingdom), and Mexican relations with Cuba and the factors that have influenced those relationships. They end with a set of recommendations based on lessons drawn from that history.